LSAT 120 – Section 3 – Question 23
LSAT 120 - Section 3 - Question 23
October 2005You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.
Target time: 1:28
This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds
| Question QuickView |
Type | Tags | Answer Choices |
Curve | Question Difficulty |
Psg/Game/S Difficulty |
Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PT120 S3 Q23 |
+LR
| Flaw or descriptive weakening +Flaw Causal Reasoning +CausR | A
53%
167
B
4%
155
C
13%
159
D
2%
155
E
28%
160
|
156 162 169 |
+Hardest | 146.629 +SubsectionMedium |
Television network executive: Some scientists have expressed concern about the numerous highly popular television programs that emphasize paranormal incidents, warning that these programs will encourage superstition and thereby impede the public’s scientific understanding. But these predictions are baseless. Throughout recorded history, dramatists have relied on ghosts and spirits to enliven their stories, and yet the scientific understanding of the populace has steadily advanced.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that programs that emphasize paranormal incidents will not impede the public’s scientific understanding. This is based on the fact that throughout history, story-tellers have told stories involving paranormal elements, but the public’s scientific understanding has steadily advanced during this time.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author overlooks the possibility that paranormal stories have impeded (meaning, obstructed or hindered) the public’s understanding of science, even if they haven’t completely stopped advancement of that understanding. Something can still advance while being impeded.
A
It fails to consider that one phenomenon can steadily advance even when it is being impeded by another phenomenon.
The author fails to consider that the public’s understanding of science can steadily advance even when it is being impeded by paranormal stories. This is why the author’s premise does not establish that TV shows about paranormal incidents won’t impede understanding.
B
It takes for granted that if a correlation has been observed between two phenomena, they must be causally connected.
The author does not assume that correlation proves cause. The author’s conclusion does not assert cause or rely on an assumption of cause. In fact, the author asserts that one thing (paranormal stories) does not cause another thing (impeding of understanding).
C
It fails to consider that the occurrence of one phenomenon can indirectly affect the pervasiveness of another even if the former does not impede the latter.
The conclusion is that one thing does not impede another thing. Pointing out a failure to consider what could be true “even if [one thing] does not impede [another thing]” does not show why the argument is weak. Any weakness must relate to why one thing can impede another thing.
D
It fails to consider that just because one phenomenon is known to affect another, the latter does not also affect the former.
The author does not overlook the possibility that a causal relationship is also reversed. The author does not, for example, assert that paranormal stories can’t affect public understanding because public understanding has affected paranormal stories.
E
It takes for granted that the contention that one phenomenon causes another must be baseless if the latter phenomenon has persisted despite steady increases in the pervasiveness of the former.
The contention is that paranormal TV shows impede scientific understanding. The author believes this is baseless. But the author does not cite to the fact that the impeding of scientific understanding has persisted despite increases in the pervasiveness of paranormal stories.
Take PrepTest
Review Results
LSAT PrepTest 120 Explanations
Section 1 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
- Question 26
Section 2 - Reading Comprehension
- Passage 1 – Passage
- Passage 1 – Questions
- Passage 2 – Passage
- Passage 2 – Questions
- Passage 3 – Passage
- Passage 3 – Questions
- Passage 4 – Passage
- Passage 4 – Questions
Section 3 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
- Question 26
Section 4 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
- Question 26
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment. You can get a free account here.